Why, I rant enough of my styro-skeps.
Hands down a great way to run a side-line queen/nuc/custom colony sales operation.
Works great for me.

This season I built several colonies into Lang system.
Built one Ukrainian setup for a customer.
All of these starting up from the styro-skeps.

People continue having fun at my skeps.
But I sell them the bees.
Works for me.
I hope it stays this way.

 

"We should be profit based here, not playing in the backyard."

Why?

 

Let me speak for Clayton - until he does himself.

Just playing with a non-standard hive in one's backyard amounts to little.
Such hive can be totally unsustainable, unsupported, unmanageable, illegal - such as log hive.
With a log hive you can not do much about profit - it is mostly just observation and yard furniture.
Totally non-standard.
Totally unsuitable for profit making.

But if a hive is sustainable, supported, manageable, legal, suitable for standardized mass production - you, in fact, can make profit from such system.
Better yet - compatible to the conventional predominant systems, but not equal to it.

Here is my other hive model that is totally non-standard and is totally usable for profit making - a project for my future retirement.

 

I have 4 outyards right now, but realistically I'm still playing in the backyard. My goal is a TF sideliner. I feel like I'm finally getting a little closer, but it's still to early to tell.

The main reason I switched from langstroth is simple. With my bees, and beekeeping style, it just never worked. I started experimenting with other hive designs and immediately started having some success.

Another reason for switching is the simplicity of building alternative designs. I can hoard scrap lumber over the summer and build hives in the off season during the winter. Profit wise, I currently have little to no money in any of my beekeeping equipment and being built out of 2x lumber, it should last for many seasons. I also own a portable sawmill, if I need cheap lumber large scale, I can do it myself for the cost of blades and gas.

I realize that building all my own equipment would probably not be possible on a large scale. However it's more realistic than building langstroth equipment on a large scale. There's local woodworking shops that could easily mass produce my hives for a very competitive price. They're just very easy to build.

 

So, the styro-skeps....
Now that I demonstrated how mini-colonies can be sustainably kept year around in cold winter climate - this opens up a huge opportunity for the sustainable, local bee/queen production.
Meaning - dependency on the imports can be killed.
Meaning - we can start seriously talking about local bee population development and (down the line) local mite-resistant bee development.

Thanks to the non-standard beekeeping.

Clearly, the standard beekeeping was unable to achieve this for the last 40-50 years.

 

@Clayton Huestis,

A couple of options that may facilitate discussions:

1. Utilizing standard langstroth frames with non-standard hive boxes. Many posts about different horizontal and vertical hives, using standard langstroth frames. This may include only using one size of frames (all deep or all medium, for example)

2. Complete conversion away from Langstroth frames and boxes.

 

I did make a couple long hives double deep lang frame. they excel in wintering and splits.
I winter 20 wide so 40 frames of bees honey, comb etc. a spring induced swarm impuls can net me 10 4 frame NUCs.
they winter due to a 2x4 wall construction, insulated sheathed. BTW you do not move them with bees in.

IF I did a different way, I would go with a smaller size hive, warre style, only top bars or skewers or sticks.
I want some ability to split, but would just stack them and do cut and strain, honey and wax production.

HOWEVER at time I need excluders, escape boards etc and being able to order them is nice, So I now have a couple double deep long langs, 12 or so double wall hives, Buckeye style. 30 nuc boxes, 8f and 10F homemade lang gear in deep and medium.

next project is a bee house where one lays on the hive tops for "health benefit" would charge for the "good vibrations"
so a none standard way to use bees for cash flow.

something like this

AirBeesN'Bed

Hi Honey Farm is local Hawaiian honey and pollination company passionate about honeybee education and saving the bees. Our raw and organic honey and hive products are harvested from our own hives across Hawaii and packed in North Shore. We offer a range of ecotours such as 'Bee Farm & Honey...

hihoneyfarm.com

still would put lang frames in it so staying at my age with lang frame non standard containers, as my standard.

GG

 

I've never been interested in making money from my hives, it's a backyard hobby. So I don't belong on this thread. But before disappearing, I'd like to point out that because people follow different practices, they learn different things, so it's good that there is a spread of approaches. I don't use frames or foundation, but I've learned a lot from monitoring your conversations, and I think I've helped interpret some stuff other Beesource members were puzzled by. It's interesting seeing how we observe quite different things.

BTW Greg, I applaud your point about how a low stress hive, like your polys, is the route to giving the bees spare resource capacity, so that local strains can thrive.

 

Wyatt Magnum switched from Langstroth to KHTB. He documents it in his book. He ended up selling his langstroth equipment to afford college and discovered KHTB as a way to cheaply get back into beekeeping. Les Chowder and Sam Comfort would be several more beekeepers that have documented the switch to alternative designs. Reason #1 for all three: Cheap and easy to build.

There is a huge difference between starting with an alternative design and switching. My guess, if sideliners started with another system, they would never look back. But switching is such a pain. Hence the reason Langstroth exists as we know it today. The same reason most companies/individuals still use Microsoft Windows® while there are more robust and dynamic systems available for their hardware.

I didn't see it at the time, but now I'm glad I was too broke to invest too heavily into langstroth. What I'm working on for my main system is the very dynamic Layens/Half Layens. Still have a few wrinkles to work out. But it's looking very promising. I can't see why this wouldn't work on a large scale with any thing from micro, medium, large, and behemoth sized colonies.

 

I hope respondents will include representative pics of their hives.

 

double wall hive.

insulative side battens.

cedar frame, filled with wool wrapped in 8oz duck cloth

with bees, d+d+m top or 4th box is full of raw wool.

GG

 

A couple of options that may facilitate discussions:

I've spent some time reflecting upon this.

2. Complete conversion away from Langstroth frames and boxes.

As someone who keeps records and treats their apiaries as a business, I think this direction is not for me. What hive is better than Langstroth and has the resources and backing of industry? Don't get me wrong I love honeybees in general. Thus I like all types of hives they are kept in. If it was just a hobby with a few hives I'd try layens hive or ukrainian, heck maybe even that bee barn. After all it would just be for fun. I have done Dadant-blatt, TBH, warre/ comfort, to name a few. I already have the bees so why not have a little fun, while doing a sideline. None of these have I take seriously.

Just wondering: Why have none of you made a 12 frame Langstroth? Not exotic enough????

1. Utilizing standard langstroth frames with non-standard hive boxes. Many posts about different horizontal and vertical hives, using standard langstroth frames. This may include only using one size of frames (all deep or all medium, for example)

Maintaining Langstroth template makes the most sense, for me. I considered Dadant-blatt. But I gain roughly 2" per comb. Is it worth it? My honest answer has to be No. I think Dadant is a superior single brood hive. "If" I had started that way from the beginning. Simply giving the queen access to lay into the supers and driving her down and adding a queen ex solves the smaller brood box issues easily. A single deep langstroth drops the ball right here: when the supers are pulled there is not enough resources in the hive. A very dangerous thing and a major flaw. We are at the mercy of the supply of sugar and the price of sugar. Leaving politics aside, neither of these can be trusted anymore. Should a time come where I couldn't source sugar or get it cheaply. Everything would be at risk. Would a 12 fr. langstroth improve things????

OSB (one size box) makes a lot of sense. However deep boxes are out due to physical injury. They caused it so.... All mediums. Makes perfect sense. I see very little drawbacks here. Still not standard to the industry. 1x8 lumber is easy to obtain and can make everything cheaply. Hoffman frames? Only if i want too.

If I want a Ukrainian hive or Layens, I can still have a few of those too.

 

Just wondering: Why have none of you made a 12 frame Langstroth? Not exotic enough????

Heavy to move/lift a box.
Squat (low) box.

Working these is very hard - you must constantly bend down OR kneel down.
Multiply this by 20-30-50 (hives) - I don't care for this design at all (just as I don't care for 10-frame Langs).

OR - you must have elevated stands for all.
Elevated stands do make sense - for horizontal hives - but for multi-box verticals the changing work-level makes this not very practical.

Working a 12-frame Ukrainian is easy - you simply stand naturally (I do).
A huge difference on your back and knees.

PS: I had several 12-frame Lang boxes - they are ALL converted into Ukrainians (below is 12-frame Ukrainian).

Why should I kill myself - bending and crawling about?
I dunno what's up - but the basic human ergonomics is the last thought for most beekeepers.
What is the deal?
What is so hard to understand that the human work ergonomics do matter?

 

Just wondering: Why have none of you made a 12 frame Langstroth? Not exotic enough????

I've run a long langstroth for many years with reasonable results. If a person looks at it like a horizontal hive that gets supered it might have an advantage over a 10 frame. My gripe with the Langstroth frame as a horizontal is it's just simply an awkward shape. Not deep enough and too long a top bar.

OSB (one size box) makes a lot of sense. However deep boxes are out due to physical injury. They caused it so.... All mediums. Makes perfect sense. I see very little drawbacks here. Still not standard to the industry. 1x8 lumber is easy to obtain and can make everything cheaply. Hoffman frames? Only if i want too.

I am working towards a one box size system myself. I considered using all mediums but investment wise it just doesn't make sense. Three medium are roughly equivalent to two deeps. Three medium are always going to cost more than two deeps. It's not any quicker to build medium equipment. Then you also have a poor frame/dead space to comb ratio with medium. All deeps were out of the question from the get go.

 

hmmm
ok i'll build the boxes and you build the frames.

I hate building frames. I guess I could get a pneumatic stapler, i now do 14 nails per frame by hand. have for many Moons.

what ever done, IMO square is nice, lets you orient parallel or perpendicular, and allow warm or cool way entrance with the same BBs. if the depth did not go much over 9 5/8 my extractor would work.. again for supers, the Brood box can be Layens deep or jumbo dadant deep. Ukraine deep etc

I think you might have misunderstood his comment. I think he was saying he really liked Greg's simple frame design. Of course there's always a chance that I misunderstood his comment too

I actually don't have a pneumatic stapler either. I don't even have an air compressor. I have a Ryobi 18v cordless 18ga narrow crown stapler that does all I need. Got it off eBay for ~$50 bare tool. Got an adapter that allows me to use 18v batteries I already had to avoid needing to get an extra battery and charger just for that.

I do like Greg's CVH hive. Do I see myself building 800 of those boxes??? Not really. Actually its the frame Contruction I truly like. Simple and cheap, right up my alley. There are 3 things to balance here:

1. whats best for the bees
2. whats best for the beekeeper
3. whats best for business/ profit

A square CVH checks the first two much better than a Langstroth in my experience. Bees and beekeepers absolutely love these hives.

The third one all depends on how you do it. There is no reason that a CVH can't be managed exactly like a Langstroth. I don't see how it would negatively affect profit. I'm already invested into the Layens ecosystem but a square 10 frame deep langstroth is something I think I could get behind. Frames would be only slightly longer and deeper than a half Layens. To me that size box and frame just feels right.

Building 800 boxes does seem huge. But if you divide it up by apiary, it doesn't seem quite so big. I try to keep my apiaries compatible and self sufficient. Both with bees and equipment.

 

There is no reason that a CVH can't be managed exactly like a Langstroth

I manage it exactly like a conventional Lang.
No difference.

The main feature is - I manage it by a box because I can.
Most anyone can.

 

Greg, what do you do with all of the sawdust?
Have you come up with an ideal width for topbars?
I don't understand how top and bottom bars can be the same length.

My experience when I attempted something similarto your CVH is that the bees would come up with different ideas as to how and where to build their comb than what I wanted them to build. Which is why I like Langstroth. But making simple frames remains a temptation.

 

All the sawdust is very efficient and only necessary.

I don't waist sawdust in making the Hoffman figurines - that is waste of my time and wood.

Top bar/bottom bar - 1" x 3/8".
I am not looking for an "ideal".
It lets the bees pass thru - good enough.

The cross section of the top bar/bottom bar are the same.
.......top bar and bottom bar are identical (but in the length)..... ---> ....identical (except in the length)...

Never once I had issues with the comb building - give them a starter strip and plug it in.
100% foundation-free.

 

I know a beekeeper who runs 30 frame Langstroth frame length in a horizontal hive. He has divide boards and multiple(three for sure) entrance holes drilled in front of horizontal hive. He can remove the lid by removing the hinge pins. Easy to place a queen excluder and add Langstroth honey supers. Just place a piece of plywood or migratory lid configuration over sections that are one deep depth or sections not being used. One can move a couple of frames from populous sections and start a Nuc. Put divider boards on sides and a piece of styrofoam insulation in any voids not being used.

 

I know a beekeeper who runs 30 frame Langstroth frame length in a horizontal hive. ........

This is a fine hive - as long as - you never ever move it/migrate with it any significant distance.
Then it becomes a bear.
Takes too much footage too - IF it is a problem (may or may not be).

 

Moving any long hive is usually more difficult due to weight and length. This fellow had a Bobcat so with forks can easily move it. Likely doesn't move it from his home yard as he is likely in it fairly often.

One can also remove five or ten frames to a Lansgtroth box if they have a desire to create a new hive and to move.

 

My lift is designed to use horizontal handles. With horizontal handles I can place the feet of the lift at any level to do a number of manipulations without having to deconstruct the hive fully.

 

hope this is not going too off topic, but the discussion about the pegs (vertical handles) vs regular horizontal handles got me thinking. For boxes that are closer to the ground, the horizontal handles allow you to lift off easily. As the stack gets taller, I guess the pegs give you a better grasping purchase.
I am planning to make the hive start very close to the ground next spring. I have had good success with simple lag bolts as stand legs. They allow bottle caps facing down, with high temp grease, to be completely ant proof. That will allow my warres to grow some more without getting too tall. and make my snelgrove splits easier. Equivalent to a five frame langstroth cross section.

 

hope this is not going too off topic, but the discussion about the pegs (vertical handles) vs regular horizontal handles got me thinking. For boxes that are closer to the ground, the horizontal handles allow you to lift off easily. As the stack gets taller, I guess the pegs give you a better grasping purchase.
I am planning to make the hive start very close to the ground next spring. I have had good success with simple lag bolts as stand legs. They allow bottle caps facing down, with high temp grease, to be completely ant proof. That will allow my warres to grow some more without getting too tall. and make my snelgrove splits easier. Equivalent to a five frame langstroth cross section.

There is nothing to prevent adding peg corners as Greg shows in his reworked Langs. The peg or horned hive design lends itself to construction with narrow width boards and reinforces the butt and pass joinery. You could add a crosswise horizontal cleat or cut in the conventional Lang finger pockets on peg corner hives. They might mess with some common insulation schemes though.

I had to screw on full width horizontal handholds of 1 1/2" square stock to be able to lift deep Lang honey supers on some hives I was looking after this summer. No way could it have been done by me with finger pockets alone.

 

Where can those polycarbonate sheets be purchased in the U.S.? (That he shows in the video) I make my own equipment and when I started out I found a guy from Ucrania that showed how to make the peg style. They are much easier to make than the finger joints and allowed me to use irregular width inexpensive Eastern Red Cedar. I think they are stronger than conventional Langstroth boxes and will last longer. With the pegs they are very easy to grab and move when full. (I did find polycarbonate at Menards, a 3 foot by 6 foot sheet is $115. Very expensive.

 

I have more factual CVH material to share - vs. the theoretical talk.

A fully packed CVH box, as pictured, weighs 42 pounds (19 kilos).
This is packed with honey to the gills - but for the math convenience we can max it at 45 pounds/20 kilos.
It is heavy, BUT I (a skinny, small guy) - can safely manipulate this weight due to superior ergonomics of it.

For the record, the walls are made of 2" wood - just because it is easier to find for free in the US.
But I like 2" wood and I will stick with it - at the expense of heavier boxes, I like the extra thermal factor.
Thin wood is also a viable option and makes the boxes lighter by 1-2 pounds.

 

I have more factual CVH material to share - vs. the theoretical talk.

You have a favorite hive. My hobby is R&D and I can change hive or anything else in a second if I figure out something better. In this case, I am pretty much satisfied with format of my hive, so I will not switch to CVH.

I have completed a second stand with load cells, and now I will have to find something new for entertainment.

 

So what are the ergonomics of this 45 pound/20 kilo box.
They are very much superior to the conventional boxes.
That much should be obvious, but let me show something.

1)The placement of the handles and the distribution of the weight lifted are superior in the pegged CVH design.
Obviously, with the conventional approach the physics of the leverage are working against your finger tips and your arms/back.
The CVH reduced that leverage to the minimum - notice, you lift/move the box with the frames in vertical positions (no worries, the frames are securely glued in place as we all know).

 

2) How you lift the 45 pound/20 kilos containers placed on the ground?
Notice - I specially placed 6 Lang frames into the picture (just for the demo) - these are compatible to the 9 frames of the CVH by loaded weight.

Well, again the conventional box has zero ergonomics to speak of.
Either you break your back OR you must kneel and then get up from that awkward position with your load.
The conventional box has no handles for vertical placement/handling - for shame (but surely cheap).

The pegged CVH - you comfortably grab the box handles, then lift it with your legs and straight back - because you can due to the handle position - again, a build-in design of the pegged, square design.
(if you worked in a warehouse a little, you know)

 

Transportation of the pegged CVH square boxes provides for either vertical OR horizontal ways - your choice, case by case.
By design, there are handles to be used either way.

I'd prefer the cleat handles, but in this case I went lazy and left the original Lang cut-outs (which I almost never use).

 

This is a classic case of putting the cart before the horse.
You are suggesting that the design be pushed on the customer. This is entirely backwards - the CUSTOMER is the one that picks the design that best suits THEIR NEEDS.

If you (a designer of a non-Lang) want to appeal to the commercial market, you'll have to do so based on how it will financially help THEM. Save money? Increase Production? Lower manpower costs?

 

This is a classic case of putting the cart before the horse.
You are suggesting that the design be pushed on the customer. This is entirely backwards - the CUSTOMER is the one that picks the design that best suits THEIR NEEDS.

If you (a designer of a non-Lang) want to appeal to the commercial market, you'll have to do so based on how it will financially help THEM. Save money? Increase Production? Lower manpower costs?

Until customers offered a choice - they don't know any better.
Many a customer have not a clue.
Heck, 80-90% of the customers have no clue - they keep using and reusing equipment hardly suitable to them (but they don't even know it).
They don't even know how to use their own equipment - I deal with it routinely.
(I refer to hobby/small scale people here).

You come up with a new design and try to sell it - not push.
This is how new products are developed.
This is how innovations come about.

"Pushing" is a wrong word - no one is pushing anything.
"Demonstrating" is the right word.
"Selling" is totally appropriate word.
How is it pushing?

The existing manufacturers are pushing their stuff - that's who.
They have no desire to innovate or offer better choices - why should they spend money when they already have their captive audience - very convenient to them.
Because the customers have not a clue themselves to even ask for anything different.
This is how the captive audience works - in any context.

Truly the USSR model - you have two choices of the men underwear - black or blue.
That is the current state of affairs in the US conventional equipment market.

 

I wonder sometimes about the motivation or pay off from so strenuously bashing the Langstroth system. I dont think that ridiculing the users or maligning the present day manufacturers of it is going to make it go away or encourage exploring alternatives; it has, and is, serving many people well.

People who are feeling the effects of its very real limitations could start considering alternatives. I think ready availability of Lang equipment is the big issue. Alternate systems have a learning curve and and in many cases are not readily adaptable to common extractors. There is not the same level of user support from common media such as Youtube; alternative equipment is very much a custom build situation that would not fit most peoples pistols.

I am really feeling the limitations of the stacked Langs system; simply getting too heavy for me to handle the work involved during peak swarm control time. I have followed a lot of discussion here on the forums about alternative set ups and have the wood working equipment to make the necessary equipment workarounds. For me it will be an interesting diversion! Not so sure that it would entice many newcomers though.

It really could be extremely low cost way to enjoy beekeeping and relatively easy for someone who already has the basic bee knowledge. Would it be an easy in for the uninitiated?

 

Would it be an easy in for the uninitiated?

Like I said - there is NO difference in the management from the conventional ways - you copy them exactly 1:1 with the CVH.

The difference is in physical accessibility to those with limited abilities.
No one ever cares or understands this on both ends - manufacturers or the consumers.

And I will continue bashing the lack of care for those with limited abilities.
I have limited abilities myself - and so I care.

 

What an odd thread.

Anyone who says "let's explore alternatives to see if we learn stuff" is sharply criticised. This is a place for calm dialectic, not dogma.

I just got back from our national honey show. Beekeepers, here at least, are old. Greg's point about lifting heavy weights is very pertinent.

Regarding Langstroths, once a standard has been created it is very difficult to change it due to the installed base of Stuff. There are many examples in computing, law etc where the original design was flawed and people have aðded extraordinarily convoluted tweak upon tweak to the original design to try and fix it. Don't assume any one hive type is optimal for all situations.

An interesting example from the show: talking to the charity Bees Abroad, they find that in Africa there is a cost tradeoff for hives. For some people, even a locally made wooden Top Bar Hive is too expensive an investment, especially if it's at risk of being stolen. The solution is one use woven hives. No point having complicated hives when the local species will just abscond if you over-inspect them! After about 3 years the bees have likely migrated on, the hive is degrading and you burn it to kill pests and disease and weave another. An elegant solution.